Type me please!! ILI or LII?

[Myst]

No, cuz if you know ur friend you probably know what he likes etc.

I was more talking about morality in general

So you mean it's selfish if you yourself want to decide what's good and bad, but you can go along with what your friend finds good for themselves?

[Number 9 large]

So you mean it's selfish if you yourself want to decide what's good and bad, but you can go along with what your friend finds good for themselves?

It's fine to judge what's good or bad for yourself only. You can't do it for others, unless you know them personally.
This is why ethics and morality are flawed. They try to design universal values, which don't exist. What is freedom to one is a cage to the other.
Morality and ethics are subjective.
Therefore it's selfish to think that just because you value something equals value to another person aswel.
This is why I don't like people who tend to take moral highgrounds, thinking they can decide for others, and blaming them when they don't abide by their rules.

This is why I think censorship should be taken out of society, for example.
This also causes people to slow down science, for example, as pro-life people think that just because they find that stem-cell research is unethical, everybody must abide by their rules/values.
Can say the same for gay marriage.
Just because you don't like an anal pounding, doesn't mean someone else doesn't.
Who are YOU to decide what's good for other people?
Humility is a godsend, often overlooked.
People forget that they are people, and think that what they think is/should be law for everyone.
I think that's the most selfish, arrogant way to look upon life/other people.
That's what I mean.

[Myst]

It's fine to judge what's good or bad for yourself only. You can't do it for others, unless you know them personally.
This is why ethics and morality are flawed. They try to design universal values, which don't exist. What is freedom to one is a cage to the other.
Morality and ethics are subjective.
Therefore it's selfish to think that just because you value something equals value to another person aswel.
This is why I don't like people who tend to take moral highgrounds, thinking they can decide for others, and blaming them when they don't abide by their rules.

Heh you are so against the LSE stereotypes here

You also seem quite flexible/strong with Ethics (socionics Ethics)? I'm putting a question mark there because it's not wholly unambiguous to me.

This is why I think censorship should be taken out of society, for example.
This also causes people to slow down science, for example, as pro-life people think that just because they find that stem-cell research is unethical, everybody must abide by their rules/values.
Can say the same for gay marriage.
Just because you don't like an anal pounding, doesn't mean someone else doesn't.
Who are YOU to decide what's good for other people?
Humility is a godsend, often overlooked.
People forget that they are people, and think that what they think is/should be law for everyone.
I think that's the most selfish, arrogant way to look upon life/other people.
That's what I mean.

Gotcha and agreed if you meant this.

[Myst]

Btw. Your profile pic vibes more Beta NF than Gamma NT. To me anyway.

[Nehtaro]

Getting typed by people on this (or any) forum is like getting a diagnosis from a medieval European doctor. They could be right, they're probably wrong, but the one thing you know for sure is you're gonna get covered in leeches and eventually die.

[Myst]

Getting typed by people on this (or any) forum is like getting a diagnosis from a medieval European doctor. They could be right, they're probably wrong, but the one thing you know for sure is you're gonna get covered in leeches and eventually die.

Funny analogy.

Anyway, you are right with how the OP himself needs to decide his own typing. These options preferably given with reasoning are just things he can take into account in the process of deciding, nothing more, nothing less.

[idontgiveaf]

Okay. You're a sensor.

SEE.

See, this is an SEE. I sensed some Fi here. Se and Fi

SEE ftw.

[Number 9 large]

Okay. You're a sensor.

SEE.

See, this is an SEE. I sensed some Fi here. Se and Fi

SEE ftw.

that almost sounded like a rhyme hahaha

[idontgiveaf]

that almost sounded like a rhyme hahaha

Yeah see?! See, he's fucking SEE?!

[schwiftyrickty]

That was an interesting read. But all I really got from it is that you are definitely Beta or Gamma. Not sure why you always test LII?

ILI seems like the most obvious answer, but who knows?

[Myst]

@Number 9 large

As promised - commenting on your type here.


You originally said here: "At the end of the day all you see is a guy who kicked a ball. Your interpretation isnt the only one. Therefore im saying you should be more open, because your expectations cloud reality. Any behaviour can be explained through any cognitive ability. The truth is you dont really know peoples motives unless they honestly tell you, thats why you shouldnt judge a book by its cover and try to get to know those 'SEEs' before you lable them."

So, it seemed like NF>NT to me with the focus on getting to know the person before labeling them. (Subjectively the impression is also fitting with beta NF. But that's just my impression.)

Oh and E6 for enneagram, not the first time I see you getting a bit negative-ish paranoid-ish. No deep analysis here for enneatype but it seems fitting if that helps.


Oh also, you said in that thread also: "I dont really wanna argue with someone that has locked me into iei and sees confirmation of me being fe creative where ever i go."

I didn't "lock" you into IEI. I also was not looking for an argument, I'm no longer into typing people in that way.

[Number 9 large]

@Number 9 large

As promised - commenting on your type here.


You originally said here: "At the end of the day all you see is a guy who kicked a ball. Your interpretation isnt the only one. Therefore im saying you should be more open, because your expectations cloud reality. Any behaviour can be explained through any cognitive ability. The truth is you dont really know peoples motives unless they honestly tell you, thats why you shouldnt judge a book by its cover and try to get to know those 'SEEs' before you lable them."

So, it seemed like NF>NT to me with the focus on getting to know the person before labeling them. (Subjectively the impression is also fitting with beta NF. But that's just my impression.)

Oh and E6 for enneagram, not the first time I see you getting a bit negative-ish paranoid-ish. No deep analysis here for enneatype but it seems fitting if that helps.


Oh also, you said in that thread also: "I dont really wanna argue with someone that has locked me into iei and sees confirmation of me being fe creative where ever i go."

I didn't "lock" you into IEI. I also was not looking for an argument, I'm no longer into typing people in that way.

Well isnt it just common sense to not judge a book by its cover? How is this fe exactly? Are you saying nt people always judge a book by its cover and anybody who doesnt leans feeling?
All youre doing is repeating what ive said, then labeling it with stuff that you already had in mind about me. I dont see any logical explanation here. My words had nothing to do with promoting emotional atmoshere, im just trying to give pole insights. Unless you think giving advice means being fe creative, by all means, but at least explain instead of name calling, cuz thats of no use to me. And yes i am open to new input. Not old input with no constructive arguments to back things up with.
Like u did in the vi thread. You just said F-type period. As if thats anything constructive. Yes i know u think im iei, but come up with something better than "you gave somebody advice, so thats kinda like fe and i think youre iei anyway so every time i see something iei-like in you imma mention it". It has no value that u see it, dont you see? Its just an opinion you have of me and thats fine, but i dont need to hear it all the time, definitely not when im discussing other stuff and you randomly pop up and go again, "yep this is iei" thats seriously annoying

[ooo]

Yep, right, it's extremely annoying when one's typed randomly just for the laughters of the online people.
Aywayyy. You give me a LSI impression, you use logic, a lot, but it's your own. You even think you know it all somehow about what others ought to think and what it's best to contemplate, Se. I say Se because although you think it's all making sense in your head (which to me is really not the case... lulz), you're just relaying on the world as it is, as the people around you want it to be like, that's Se, no new possibilities.

I considered SLE too but you say you're introverted and don't like to approach girls first, and that's all for LSI. They're aggressors ok, but so are lions and they hardly move their ass, unless they wanna kill someone. You could be shy at first, but you seem quite determined about your "preys" and how they gotta be anyway.

[Number 9 large]

Yep, right, it's extremely annoying when one's typed randomly just for the laughters of the online people.
Aywayyy. You give me a LSI impression, you use logic, a lot, but it's your own. You even think you know it all somehow about what others ought to think and what it's best to contemplate, Se. I say Se because although you think it's all making sense in your head (which to me is really not the case... lulz), you're just relaying on the world as it is, as the people around you want it to be like, that's Se, no new possibilities.

I considered SLE too but you say you're introverted and don't like to approach girls first, and that's all for LSI. They're aggressors ok, but so are lions and they hardly move their ass, unless they wanna kill someone. You could be shy at first, but you seem quite determined about your "preys" and how they gotta be anyway.

Okay can you give me examples of me wanting the world to be as it is, with no new possibilities?

Also what makes you think that being a knowitall is se creative? Arent ilis supposed to be critics, so basically, knowitalls?

Can you also give me an example of something that seems like it makes sense to me but you think is wrong? And how this would make me ti se fi ne?

Unless you can give me examples, its just gonna be another useless opinion of me with no valuable arguments for backup

[ooo]

your choice of following law school for the possibilities you'd have. your repulsion of people and social things.

you think of your things that are revolving all around the physical essence of matters (we all die= it's all useless), without seeing any further options, even showing a real marked lack of Ni, which could really come in help as HA.

I don't agree with any of your vision of the world for it to be just "efficient" as in putting girls on a scale to determine if you'll be attracted to each other, or following what it's more convenient just in case, as in doing law school, Se/Ti here.

I don't know many ti se fi ne, maybe I'm wrong.

edit: I'm gonna leave it there but "repulsion to people and social things" is wrong, I just get that vibe lol.. (I think we're super-ego types, but who knows), instead you have problems with doing your chores, LII got that too, I got that too, we both share a rational main function, but they are directed by different ideas.

[Myst]

Well isnt it just common sense to not judge a book by its cover? How is this fe exactly? Are you saying nt people always judge a book by its cover and anybody who doesnt leans feeling?

I was saying: "focus on getting to know the person before labeling them". That means a personal Ethics based approach of getting to know the people rather than the impersonal Logic based approach of labeling. Seemed like the natural approach for you (this part is subjective impression though - the rest of the reasoning above is strictly going by the definitions tho').

So, I wasn't saying anything about judging a book by its cover in terms of Ethics but I would say that was your Intuitive side applying this metaphor.

All youre doing is repeating what ive said, then labeling it with stuff that you already had in mind about me. I dont see any logical explanation here.

Please feel free to ask for clarification if the above wasn't clear.

My words had nothing to do with promoting emotional atmoshere, im just trying to give pole insights. Unless you think giving advice means being fe creative, by all means, but at least explain instead of name calling, cuz thats of no use to me. And yes i am open to new input. Not old input with no constructive arguments to back things up with.

Where did I do any kind of name calling? Really no idea what you saw as that. I did none of that.

I disagree that it was "old input" without any constructive argument.

Btw you never said anything on whether the Te PoLR explanation made sense. Did you have any thoughts on that one?

Like u did in the vi thread. You just said F-type period. As if thats anything constructive.

Ask if you need more info about why I say something. I saw you as F type because you seemed soft feely enough in looks for it. This is just my impression and I never claimed otherwise.

Yes i know u think im iei, but come up with something better than "you gave somebody advice, so thats kinda like fe and i think youre iei anyway so every time i see something iei-like in you imma mention it". It has no value that u see it, dont you see?

Sorry, but, you are really imagining things here, I didn't say this, not even close to this.

Its just an opinion you have of me and thats fine, but i dont need to hear it all the time, definitely not when im discussing other stuff and you randomly pop up and go again, "yep this is iei" thats seriously annoying

Already got the idea that you prefer discussion of your type in your type thread, or I wouldn't be here. I clearly respected your request regarding that.

[Slade]

Well isnt it just common sense to not judge a book by its cover? How is this fe exactly? Are you saying nt people always judge a book by its cover and anybody who doesnt leans feeling?
All youre doing is repeating what ive said, then labeling it with stuff that you already had in mind about me. I dont see any logical explanation here. M

This is what she does, and calls 'Ti'.

[Number 9 large]

your choice of following law school for the possibilities you'd have. your repulsion of people and social things.
you think of your things that are revolving all around the physical essence of matters (we all die= it's all useless), without seeing any further options, even showing a real marked lack of Ni, which could really come in help as HA.

But the universe IS all physical, so I dont really understand what youre trying to say here. Are you religious? Because I'm not, and I don't believe in supernatural things. And believing in them isn't Ni.
I'm curious what do you think is the meaning of life?

I don't agree with any of your vision of the world for it to be just "efficient" as in putting girls on a scale to determine if you'll be attracted to each other, or following what it's more convenient just in case, as in doing law school, Se/Ti here.

Just because you don't agree doesn't mean I'm LSI. This still is not an argument.

I don't know many ti se fi ne, maybe I'm wrong.

I meant the functional stack of an LSI...

edit: I'm gonna leave it there but "repulsion to people and social things" is wrong, I just get that vibe lol..

Yeah it is wrong, I actually like being around people, having a social life.
It's funny because on this site [http://www.sociotype.com/socionics/types/ILI-INTp/] it says this about ILIs at the Fe polr section, so you might be arguing in favour of my type: ''ILIs are typically out of touch with expressing their emotional states. They are often seen as cold, unresponsive, and undesiring of human contact (which is often not the case).''

(I think we're super-ego types, but who knows), instead you have problems with doing your chores, LII got that too, I got that too,

I think anybody can have that

we both share a rational main function, but they are directed by different ideas.

Still not an argument

All in all you didn't change my mind

[Number 9 large]

I was saying: "focus on getting to know the person before labeling them". That means a personal Ethics based approach of getting to know the people rather than the impersonal Logic based approach of labeling. Seemed like the natural approach for you (this part is subjective impression though - the rest of the reasoning above is strictly going by the definitions tho').

Okay, how would it be logical to judge people without getting to know them?
Is that what you do? Because that doesn't seem logical at all, and if you got a better way to get to know people's motivations without talking to them, I'll gladly hear.

So, I wasn't saying anything about judging a book by its cover in terms of Ethics but I would say that was your Intuitive side applying this metaphor.

Idk, could be, could not be.

Please feel free to ask for clarification if the above wasn't clear.

It was clear, it just wasn't meaningful and repetitive is what I'm saying.

Where did I do any kind of name calling? Really no idea what you saw as that. I did none of that.

I mean like, typecalling then, calling me or my exclamations certain types or functions. It's pretty much the same thing, derogatory remarks which feel like ad hominem remarks, diminishing the value of my statements and leading people's attention away from them and onto me.

I disagree that it was "old input" without any constructive argument.

So far your input has been opinion, which is useless. You should know that as a logical type, right?

Btw you never said anything on whether the Te PoLR explanation made sense. Did you have any thoughts on that one?

Good point, I'll look into it now.

Ask if you need more info about why I say something. I saw you as F type because you seemed soft feely enough in looks for it. This is just my impression and I never claimed otherwise.

Fair enough.

Sorry, but, you are really imagining things here, I didn't say this, not even close to this.

No you didn't say it, but it's what you're doing.

Already got the idea that you prefer discussion of your type in your type thread, or I wouldn't be here. I clearly respected your request regarding that.

good to hear. lol

[ooo]

Didn't mean to change your mind, just making my point, so sorry if I came off as rude. Didn't mean to insult you by saying you're LSI. Didn't even mean for it to be bad when I said you look like "a know it all", I am one too and introverts are just generally perceived like that. What can one do, uh.

The universe might be all physical to you, 'cause to me it's far from it. Again, here you stating your point as "it is just like that because I know how real things work". Ne is all about exchanging views, it might stick to the same ones but they're hardly ever so ultimate or mechanistic, this just looks like Se .

Of course my agreement with your opinions doesn't make you anything lol, who did you take me for? I just said that such ideas denote a rather Se valuing nature. Bit different.

[Number 9 large]

Yeah I could possibly see Fe valuing. A confrontational male IEI wanting to focus on logic strongly, happened before. Oh, and before I forget, possible Te PoLR here: "renewing my identification card or other useless bureaucratic procedures that in the end always get me into trouble". @Number 9 large what do you think of this one?

You mean this? It's probably just laziness and chronic procrastination

[Myst]

Okay, how would it be logical to judge people without getting to know them?
Is that what you do? Because that doesn't seem logical at all, and if you got a better way to get to know people's motivations without talking to them, I'll gladly hear.

Logic as an External IE makes judgments on distinct, quantifiable information and "labels" things (and yes, people) based on that. Ethics as an Internal IE makes judgments on the less concrete personal side. This is what you seemed to be discussing with getting to know people.

Idk, could be, could not be.

Well it pretty much fits the definition of what a metaphor is

It was clear, it just wasn't meaningful and repetitive is what I'm saying.

Did the above attempt now help in clarifying what I meant? My point was definitely not getting across previously.

I mean like, typecalling then, calling me or my exclamations certain types or functions. It's pretty much the same thing, derogatory remarks which feel like ad hominem remarks, diminishing the value of my statements and leading people's attention away from them and onto me.

Lol I like this phrasing, "typecalling". But no, my intention was not that. I hope I'm making that clear for you now. I was not wording things in a personal/derogatory way at all, if you think I said "haha you said iei stuff" etc, go back and check, I didn't, I was putting it all in a neutral style with a neutral attitude. (Idk if you are associating me with other previous negative experiences.)

Oh and I don't understand what you mean by diminishing the value of your statements. Your typing has nothing to do with that.

So far your input has been opinion, which is useless. You should know that as a logical type, right?

See above.

No you didn't say it, but it's what you're doing.

No, never said or implied reasoning like "you gave somebody advice, so thats kinda like fe". And no, I did not have such attitudes as you are reading into the lines here. And I'm sorry, but it's annoying to me that you try to read such negative attitudes into my lines. I get it that you didn't like me going off topic and I rectified that so can you let go of being butthurt like this lol.

You mean this? It's probably just laziness and chronic procrastination

No, these two posts:

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...=1#post1202019
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...=1#post1202372

[Myst]

This is what she does, and calls 'Ti'.

Reported this off-topic overly personal-inflammatory post.

[Number 9 large]

@Myst Oh i saw ur post at the derail, I think that's what you meant.
Yeah idk if me horribly disliking and sucking at math means im te polr.
Because honestly I think my debating skills are too logically sound to be te polr. Sound arrogant but yea. Im also not closed off to any new information, as te polr would suggest.
Besides I still often feel like a fish out of the water in social situations. meaning fe polr > te polr. But im not sure.

also this description of te polr doesnt really describe me well, i think

''When confronted with a large body of factual information with which they are unacquainted, IEIs will often hesitate and refrain from saying anything so as to avoid appearing unknowledgeable or potentially embarrassing themselves.''

Kind of true, if i know i dont know shit, I wont speak. Thats probably not te polr, just common sense.

They may feel threatened and vacillate if pressured into producing critical evaluations of factual information or statistics; they may feel as though they do not know what to do with this type of information, and often prefer to rely on their internal conceptual framework use their understanding of the relevant processes to evaluate a situation.

I dont feel threatened at all to provide criticism. In fact, it is one of the things people call me out for doing often. Whenever I hear or read a statement that I know is wrong I dont hesitate to enter debate.

They may also be wary of basing their beliefs or actions on facts from outside sources, instead preferring to rely on their own insights.

I am indeed skeptical, but if that means Te polr then shoot me.

These behaviors can sometimes lead to confusion and lack of clarity, as they may have difficulty clearly explaining and underscoring the information pertinent their ideas.

Sometimes I indeed do have trouble trying to get my point across as best as possible, but its usually because it takes a while for people to understand, not because I dont know how to explain.

They are often unconcerned with optimizing productivity or efficiency. They may generally try to avoid evaluating cost-effectiveness of resources, and are often not apt at making such discriminations.

Depends on the situation. at work, for example, I do try to consciously find the best way to maximize efficiency, so that I can finish faster. But i dont go around maximizing resources insofar as i wont change my phone agreement for example, because im simply too lazy and i think a 5 euro difference per month is not worth the effort.

They may see persons who focus extensively on practical matters as boring and inanimate.

Not per se

They deeply dislike and can avoid tedious and disinteresting tasks that involve attention to detail and pragmatic focus, such as managing one's finances. They usually are exhausted by these tasks; they have no interest in and little idea how to do them, and often find it difficult to focus.

It's true i often dont like to deal with paperwork and shit like this. im not sure if that means im automatically te polr though, could just be laziness. Also its often not that i dont know how, just that i dont have the patience to do it, or that i dont feel like finding out how. i just keep procrastinating untill the last moment and then i just do it in 10 mins or so lol

They may be petulant and unresponsive in encounters with individuals who try to mobilize them into productive tasks, and may feel that such individuals are bossy and contemptible.

I do indeed find it a bit annoying when people boss me around, but who doesnt?

They may seem overly dreamy, lost in their own enterprises, and generally oblivious to the nature of the mundane tasks that surround them.

yeah, but thats also true for ili. its a ni thing i guess

all in all i recognize some bits of it in me, but the reasons why is probably more laziness than simply being unable to do financial chores.
also if i had to describe myself, pragmatic would definitely be among the words i'd use. i always consider the ''usefulness'' of everything i do, start or experience. from jobs to people. everything i evaluate and i cut the stuff that i dont need from my life. sounds cruel but i filter everyone through the ''is this gonna work?'' question.
I always ask myself ''why'' before i do something. If i dont know ''why'', then i find the task to be very quickly off putting, because i always need a real reason to do something.
i think that argues against te polr. im not sure, but whatever. i mean, im not even entirely convinced that feeling and thinking are opposites. Its pretty common knowledge that people who are highly intelligent in logic are also more often than not highly emotionally capable and empathic. i mean look at stupid peoples ability to empathize. its non-existent, and reason to argue against the feeling thinking dichotomy. but yeah if i had to choose a type it would still be ili, because i have more trouble emotionally and socially than logically, i feel. not that that says much but whatever.

[Myst]

Yeah idk if me horribly disliking and sucking at math means im te polr.

The idea was not about how good you are at maths but about how you approach maths. You are interested in the reasoning (Ti) but allergic to having to do the calculations (Te), meaning you strongly lean on Ti over Te. Do you follow me here?


Also this bit: "Mathematics is always trying to reduce reality to some form of numbers/equation, which irritates me. To me it feels like it sucks the fun and mystery out of reality, lol."

That was really NF>NT. The focus on the fun and mystery is beta NF over gamma NT. Preferring Feeling over Thinking essentially (while of course still having the Thinking side too).

Because honestly I think my debating skills are too logically sound to be te polr. Sound arrogant but yea. Im also not closed off to any new information, as te polr would suggest.

The debating skills, that would be your relying on your Ti, not on Te. So like where you said "question the status quo because I always spot discrepancies between rules, laws and statements", that's very focused on Ti without having to have much focus on Te as well.

Besides I still often feel like a fish out of the water in social situations. meaning fe polr > te polr. But im not sure.

Well if feeling bad at social stuff means T>F then sucking at maths also has to mean F>T. Anyway, I don't think it's as simple as that to determine T vs F preference, obviously.

Communication tends to be a bit stiff, doubtful. mainly due to lack of experience i guess, but still.
Also people tend to view me as very stubborn in my views, very defensive when it comes to me defending my actions.
I mean it's because I always think twice before I do something, I hesitate a lot, so if people criticise me I always have an explanation at the ready, and am willing to protect myself from criticism.
Oftentimes though, the defending isnt needed and they are just trying to help, or it isnt necessary to tell them, or they just dont care why i did it wrongly, just that next time it shouldnt be. (often at work i experience this with my supervisors, managers).
its funny because today i was in a really good mood, and it really showed off on my performance at work (im a waiter at a restaurant, so i have to deal with people all the time, delivering food, asking if everything is alright etc.). usually im a bit anxious, but today i was much more inclined to be my ''dry'' self, and twist things up with humor. (exaggerate my dryness, making me laugh at the situation and therefore smiling at the guests).

(From that types of intelligence thread, responding here)

This seems like Te PoLR defensiveness.

I dont feel threatened at all to provide criticism. In fact, it is one of the things people call me out for doing often. Whenever I hear or read a statement that I know is wrong I dont hesitate to enter debate.

Yeah, but you rely on Ti to do it.

I am indeed skeptical, but if that means Te polr then shoot me.

How it's specific to Te PoLR is that it's about skepticism towards facts from outside sources.

all in all i recognize some bits of it in me, but the reasons why is probably more laziness than simply being unable to do financial chores.

Te PoLR isn't literally unable to do financial chores, they just dislike it because it's a pita to them.

also if i had to describe myself, pragmatic would definitely be among the words i'd use. i always consider the ''usefulness'' of everything i do, start or experience. from jobs to people. everything i evaluate and i cut the stuff that i dont need from my life. sounds cruel but i filter everyone through the ''is this gonna work?'' question.
I always ask myself ''why'' before i do something. If i dont know ''why'', then i find the task to be very quickly off putting, because i always need a real reason to do something.

Evaluating through Ti or Te though.

i think that argues against te polr. im not sure, but whatever. i mean, im not even entirely convinced that feeling and thinking are opposites. Its pretty common knowledge that people who are highly intelligent in logic are also more often than not highly emotionally capable and empathic. i mean look at stupid peoples ability to empathize. its non-existent, and reason to argue against the feeling thinking dichotomy. but yeah if i had to choose a type it would still be ili, because i have more trouble emotionally and socially than logically, i feel. not that that says much but whatever.

Thinking preference isn't about being intelligent or about totally lacking empathy, it's about operating out of the impersonal objective approach by default. Otherwise everyone does have a Thinking side too.

So going by this understanding, I do not automatically see people with the Feeling preference as less intelligent or anything like that. So if I type you as IEI it's not meant as an insult to your intelligence. If you remember I actually saw us as being on the same page a lot before with your criticism of some Socionics stuff .

im not sure that if you are te polr that means you automatically look for better logic. I mean, as a logical person, everyone should be looking for better logic. Dont we all wanna know the truth? I know I would, whether I was ''ethical'' or not. As if ILIs don't look for clarifications in people smarter than them, or know more about a topic that interests them.

Well you originally said: "what I am really searching for is someone to truly prove me wrong and say; no, the law is right because this and this and this". The idea is exactly that with Ti HA you'd be relying a lot on your own logic with a focus on developing your logical side but yet still want clarifications from others.


Anyway, I don't have more time to analyze your typing deeper but if any of the above was unclear, do ask and I'll try to clarify more.

[Number 9 large]

The universe might be all physical to you, 'cause to me it's far from it.

can you elaborate?

Again, here you stating your point as "it is just like that because I know how real things work".

yeah, cuz im pretty sure it works that way. have you ever witnessed something ''unphysical''? even consciousness is physical, its just brain signals in your brain, even though you might not think it that way.
when i say something with confidence i am challenging you to destroy my views, if you can, as i do with other people whenever i see fit.

Ne is all about exchanging views, it might stick to the same ones but they're hardly ever so ultimate or mechanistic, this just looks like Se .

they aren't, if you can provide me with good arguments. but if you can't ill stick to my views.

Of course my agreement with your opinions doesn't make you anything lol, who did you take me for? I just said that such ideas denote a rather Se valuing nature. Bit different.

yeah well then why did u say it. isnt this a typing thread? stop wasting my time

[Number 9 large]

The idea was not about how good you are at maths but about how you approach maths. You are interested in the reasoning (Ti) but allergic to having to do the calculations (Te), meaning you strongly lean on Ti over Te. Do you follow me here?

yeah but why is doing calculations te? isnt te about gaining knowledge? not about endlessly doing the same sort of exercise over and over again to become good at it? isnt that more se?

Also this bit: "Mathematics is always trying to reduce reality to some form of numbers/equation, which irritates me. To me it feels like it sucks the fun and mystery out of reality, lol."
That was really NF>NT. The focus on the fun and mystery is beta NF over gamma NT. Preferring Feeling over Thinking essentially (while of course still having the Thinking side too).

yeah, agreed. its probably because i just fucking hate numbers, lol. id rather think in words, relations in my head rather than put them down on paper in equation form
if thats feeling then ya whatever you say im not changing my type because i dont like maths

The debating skills, that would be your relying on your Ti, not on Te. So like where you said "question the status quo because I always spot discrepancies between rules, laws and statements", that's very focused on Ti without having to have much focus on Te as well.

thats actually ni. i can quote from sociotype here from the intp from the ni section:

The ILI, with their often unusual perceptions, may come across as unreachable, esoteric eccentrics. Because ILIs are confident about analyzing the implications of the knowledge that they have gathered, ILIs often appear perceptive, especially in fields of interest, and commonly tend to view the ideas of others with skepticism and scrutiny. ILIs may tend perceive others' intellectual contributions as deeply misguided or limited in scope, and may hold the viewpoint that many people do not know what they're talking about on a particular topic of interest.

you can say whatever you want, but this is from the ni-lead section of ILI on sociotype.com, so yeah... that's Ni then, not ti.

Well if feeling bad at social stuff means T>F then sucking at maths also has to mean F>T. Anyway, I don't think it's as simple as that to determine T vs F preference, obviously.

Its not about feeling bad socially its about social clunkiness, which I've had for a long time and for a part still have. Also since when is maths the pinpoint for logical thinking? Its just a format to reduce variables into. it bores me. Language, however, is also a format in which you can practise logical thinking in a way more concise way; the format I prefer, so your argument is invalid, while mine still stands.

This seems like Te PoLR defensiveness.

yeah thats ur interpretation. you could also argue that its strong ni + te and that I am very capable of defending my views with confidence, which I always do.
You could even argue its Ti+Se, but I'm too subassertive to be Se, and don't nearly care enough about my physical environment to be Se, and I don't necessarily value Ne. In any case it's not Te polr. Why? Because I know myself better than you do, that's why.

Yeah, but you rely on Ti to do it.

Yeah, or it's Ni + Te, as I said before, any action can be explained through any function, so suck it.

How it's specific to Te PoLR is that it's about skepticism towards facts from outside sources.

yeah well if you argue that being skeptical is in favour of being shit at logic then i dont wanna live on this planet anymore.

Te PoLR isn't literally unable to do financial chores, they just dislike it because it's a pita to them.

yeah fine, i dislike it. everything else still points away from te polr. I can also quote another text from sociotype from the ILI in which it says this:

ILI often spend a great deal of time simply thinking and may spend excessive amounts of time in their mind. Most ILIs somehow manage to spend most of their time in their minds regardless of the [FINANCIAL] responsibilities with which they are burdened.

I highlighted the stuff in red for you to underline the fact that I dont like doing financial stuff because it distracts from my Ni musings.

Well you originally said: "what I am really searching for is someone to truly prove me wrong and say; no, the law is right because this and this and this". The idea is exactly that with Ti HA you'd be relying a lot on your own logic with a focus on developing your logical side but yet still want clarifications from others.

Yeah you can call that Ti HA. You can also call that Te creative, because Te is constantly looking for new information. Factual information, not stupid opinions. You can also call it Ne because I look for another ''worldview'' on the subject. You could also call it Se aggressor looking for a victim to match up to his intellectual level. Call it whatever the fuck you want, I'm still ILI, and that's that.
Stop trying to make me out to be an IEI because I'm not, and I'm tired of having to defend my type against your annoying tunnel-visioned 'insights'. Case closed.

[Myst]

@Number 9 large

OK, first off, I don't need you to type as IEI*, I was simply describing what I see and how I interpret that. I already said I won't have time to go into your typing deeper, either, so clearly I'm not invested in having you retype as IEI. I simply don't care about that. All in all, it's obviously up to you how you use the input, so there is no need to get so defensive. It's not such a fucking big deal if we disagree.

*: I didn't imagine I had to state the usual disclaimer but I will now: eventually, it's you who decides on your own typing and it's you who has the most access to data on yourself, I'm only analyzing what you showed here on this forum, nothing more, nothing less. This is not anything personal.

So I replied to your post in detail but I won't spend more time on explaining my points further for you, unless you drop the defensiveness and stick to being objective instead and try to genuinely consider my points that way.

yeah but why is doing calculations te? isnt te about gaining knowledge? not about endlessly doing the same sort of exercise over and over again to become good at it? isnt that more se?

It requires "externalizing" the logic beyond just understanding the reasoning with Ti. You yourself said you just want the reasoning for the concepts (Ti) and not go into, so to speak, "mindless application" of it (Te, as seen from a Ti pov specifically).

yeah, agreed. its probably because i just fucking hate numbers, lol. id rather think in words, relations in my head rather than put them down on paper in equation form
if thats feeling then ya whatever you say im not changing my type because i dont like maths

It's not that you don't like maths - it's why you don't. And that was the Ethics/Feeling based bit.

thats actually ni. i can quote from sociotype here from the intp from the ni section:

Depending on how you do it, it can be Ni, but you were originally arguing that this makes you strong in logical reasoning...

Its not about feeling bad socially its about social clunkiness, which I've had for a long time and for a part still have. Also since when is maths the pinpoint for logical thinking? Its just a format to reduce variables into.

You said you like the reasoning for things behind the maths. That is definitely to do with Logical thinking. Mathematics in general is way way more than just a "format", it's pure logic.

Language, however, is also a format in which you can practise logical thinking in a way more concise way; the format I prefer, so your argument is invalid, while mine still stands.

Not that simple. Mathematics is purely Logical information (with some parts being Ti, some being Te), language can and will allow for other information processing.

(To be entirely precise, finding solutions in maths can also involve Intuition of course, but the actual maths is Logic.)

yeah thats ur interpretation. you could also argue that its strong ni + te and that I am very capable of defending my views with confidence, which I always do.

I was referring to the defensiveness you yourself explicitly mentioned:"very defensive when it comes to me defending my actions". "I hesitate a lot, so if people criticise me I always have an explanation at the ready".

I see more defensiveness than confidence here too, to be honest. Things like "so suck it", "then ya whatever you say im not changing my type because", "you can say whatever you want", "then i dont wanna live on this planet anymore", "call it whatever the fuck you want".

You could even argue its Ti+Se, but I'm too subassertive to be Se, and don't nearly care enough about my physical environment to be Se, and I don't necessarily value Ne. In any case it's not Te polr. Why? Because I know myself better than you do, that's why.

That's not real reasoning there, yes, you know yourself better than I do, but this is about interpreting your things in terms of the theory. And no, this is not some hint that you are stupid or whatever for not being able to type yourself correctly.

Yeah, or it's Ni + Te, as I said before, any action can be explained through any function, so suck it.

Where I said you rely on Ti to argue, what I meant was you come off as relying strongly on your own view of reasoning for things, instead of taking in all facts "as is" to work with them. Is all I meant.

yeah well if you argue that being skeptical is in favour of being shit at logic then i dont wanna live on this planet anymore.

No, this was about skepticism towards facts from outside sources, not about being shit at logic in general, e.g. the Ti kind of reasoning.

Also when you talk about logic... many people just mean whatever way to get stuff sorted in everyday matters. In Socionics Logic/Thinking isn't exactly the same as that.

yeah fine, i dislike it. everything else still points away from te polr.

"Everything else" that you were willing to take into account. Not quite literally "everything else" because you didn't take everything into account. That's not my problem though, I don't need you to.

I can also quote another text from sociotype from the ILI in which it says this
I highlighted the stuff in red for you to underline the fact that I dont like doing financial stuff because it distracts from my Ni musings.

The quote wasn't talking about disliking financial stuff specifically.

Yeah you can call that Ti HA. You can also call that Te creative, because Te is constantly looking for new information. Factual information, not stupid opinions.

You were specifically looking for "no, the law is right because this and this and this", which is a Ti reasoning, not Te raw facts.

Call it whatever the fuck you want, I'm still ILI, and that's that. Stop trying to make me out to be an IEI because I'm not, and I'm tired of having to defend my type against your annoying tunnel-visioned 'insights'. Case closed.

Again, feel free to type ILI, I never said you must switch types. And nah, you are not required to defend anything, and please don't while you are this emotional and defensive. It's annoying, too.

[ooo]

Everything Myst said.

Anyway, about the physical essence of the world, I recommend you to read Jung, he talks about something called synchronicity that transcends cause-effect and is only perceived through meaning. This is the essence of N somehow, connections beyond matter.

[Number 9 large]

@Number 9 large
OK, first off, I don't need you to type as IEI*, I was simply describing what I see and how I interpret that. I already said I won't have time to go into your typing deeper, either, so clearly I'm not invested in having you retype as IEI.

Wtf, so you don't have time to come up with reasonable arguments, but you do have time to give your stupid opinion?
Stop wasting my time. I already said I only want facts, not fucking interpretations.

So I replied to your post in detail but I won't spend more time on explaining my points further for you, unless you drop the defensiveness and stick to being objective instead and try to genuinely consider my points that way.

Good, cuz it's not helping at all.

It requires "externalizing" the logic beyond just understanding the reasoning with Ti. You yourself said you just want the reasoning for the concepts (Ti) and not go into, so to speak, "mindless application" of it (Te, as seen from a Ti pov specifically).

How is doing maths exercises Te. If anything, math is Ti because it heavily involves rules and laws, such as when derived from physics. Math is a big part of physics, and if you study any math related thing at university, it almost always involves physics aswel)
Shuffling around equations and applying the mathematical rules and laws of equations in different scenario's can be heavility attributed to Ne.
Both my Ti and Ne are strong but unvalued, which explains why I don't give a fuck about math. And if you don't give a fuck about maths, you don't do your math homework properly, so you get shitty grades at maths.

It's not that you don't like maths - it's why you don't. And that was the Ethics/Feeling based bit.

Good question. I just don't care. It's boring. A socionics explanation would be that my Ti and Ne are unvalued, therefore I don't give a shit, but let's keep that aside, because there could be a million reasons.

Depending on how you do it, it can be Ni, but you were originally arguing that this makes you strong in logical reasoning...

Connecting the dots and making predictions based on previous experience (Ne/Ni) can certainly be acquainted with logic.

You said you like the reasoning for things behind the maths. That is definitely to do with Logical thinking. Mathematics in general is way way more than just a "format", it's pure logic.

It's pure logic in a numeric format. There is also pure logic in linguistic format. I don't like the field that maths covers. Civil engineering, physics, these are all very boring subjects to me.
Therefore I never really developed my mathematical side. It's pure disinterest. Teachers often said that it's not that I'm bad at it, but I just need to put in more effort.
And I have actually been able to get one or two high grades in maths. But that was just to get my average high enough to pass the year. I've always been a minimal effort, maximum results kind of guy (efficiency, which is Te). If I can pass high school with 5.5/10s, then why would I study harder to get anything more than a 5.5? It's not like any of that bs info that you learned in high school matters now either, so I was right all along for not putting in any extra effort (Ni).

Not that simple. Mathematics is purely Logical information (with some parts being Ti, some being Te), language can and will allow for other information processing.

The Te being I like the laws and the logic behind the maths (wanting to know them, gathering info), but I just don't like exercising maths equations, cuz it's fucking boring as shit.

Where I said you rely on Ti to argue, what I meant was you come off as relying strongly on your own view of reasoning for things,

Of course, anybody does that, whether you admit it or not. It's funny that you think that relying on your own view to reason is abnormal. As if you are some God that views the world objectively, instead of subjectively. Get off your fucking high horse, please.
Even if you do copy the views of others mindlessly, which, apparently, people without Te polr do according to your implications you still make it to be YOUR view.
So yeah, gone with your shitty argument.

instead of taking in all facts "as is" to work with them. Is all I meant.

What do you mean facts? The ''fact'' that I got Te polr? Who says that is a fact? You?
It's all your opinion and interpretation, which, for the 100th time, is meaningless to me, because you don't know me and I do know me, so it's your word against mine and my word is stronger because I actually know myself.
If anything you are Te polr because you are blind to the arguments that I put forward in my previous post that clearly indicate your views of my apparent ''Te polr'' are flawed, yet you keep insisting you are right. If that's not Te polr I don't know what is.

No, this was about skepticism towards facts from outside sources,

Yeah, I'm skeptical of outside sources, just like an ILI is supposed to be. I can give you another socionics quote in which they describe how an ILI is naturally skeptical, even nicknamed ''The Critic'', but you will ignore it, and instead assume that it must be Te polr. Because first of all you don't know your shit about socionics, and secondly you are ignorant as fuck to any new info I put forward, just like a true Te polr. Congrats, I turned your own argument against you.

Also when you talk about logic... many people just mean whatever way to get stuff sorted in everyday matters. In Socionics Logic/Thinking isn't exactly the same as that.

Okay explain, because I'm pretty sure Te polr and weak Ti manifests itself in daily matters, whatever that means.

"Everything else" that you were willing to take into account. Not quite literally "everything else" because you didn't take everything into account. That's not my problem though, I don't need you to.

You don't get that I take everything into account, obviously. You think I'm lying to myself?
Are you implying you're seeing stuff that I don't see? See it's this arrogance that annoys me about you. Arrogance and willfull ignorance. And unwillingness to change views.

The quote wasn't talking about disliking financial stuff specifically.

Yeah, so? My point still fucking stands. Is that all you can say? You are clearly OR missing my point, or arguing around it, highlighting some petty detail, as if that was the point of the argument, then disarming it as if you refuted my whole argument.

You were specifically looking for "no, the law is right because this and this and this", which is a Ti reasoning, not Te raw facts.

I was just using ''the law'' as an example wtf. Stop twisting my words and stop being an idiot who sees someone say ''the law is right'' and immediately jumps on ''oh he's saying 'law is right', that's something a Ti lead would say, so this guy is Ti''. Like seriously, that's the most shallow way of reasoning ever.
It's like I have to abandon words from my vocabulary to stop idiots like you from retyping me whenever I use them.
It's almost the same as @Medusa saying I'm not Fe polr because I typed, -->TYPED<--, ''HAHAHA''. Fucking pseudo socionics experts.

And nah, you are not required to defend anything, and please don't while you are this emotional and defensive. It's annoying, too.

You're right, I'm not required to defend my views, but I do it anyway, because I hate ignorant people who think they know it all, spewing ignorant shit all over my thread and talking uneducated shit about me, thinking they know better than me or even thinking they're helping me, whilst simultaneously ignoring all my rational arguments against their claims.

If you were a real logical type, you would listen to my arguments and change your views accordingly, but instead you just keep on hammering on tiny details, that yes, might indeed look like Te polr, like not liking maths.

I agree with @Slade that you are probably not even LSI, or any logical type for that matter. I think you might be projecting YOUR Te polr onto me. Why?
Because you're pulling the same shit onto me that Medusa (who pretty much has confirmed Te polr) was doing to me aswel: insisting I am a certain type, which might have been plausible at first glance.
At second glance, when I provided you both with more information about myself, which proved your first impression of me wrong, you should have obviously changed your minds, but you both never did, because you have Te polr. (or are retards, I don't know, I don't judge lol)
Just like @Medusa you kept harrassing me and singling out random posts of mine in random topics and pointing towards the type, even though I already refuted your claims and impressions with factual information about myself.
So yeah, there's that. Don't really know what else to say to make you stop thinking I've got a Te polr or am Fe creative, but yeah I guess there's no arguing with a person who can't take in information like normal people can.

[Myst]

Wtf, so you don't have time to come up with reasonable arguments, but you do have time to give your stupid opinion?
Stop wasting my time. I already said I only want facts, not fucking interpretations. (...)

Wtf on earth triggered you like this?

This completely paranoid, projecting crazy post you made now... You were misreading virtually everything I said, getting stuck on words to oversimplify and misrepresent my points, and trying to read negative things into my lines.

I spent my time not simply to give a "stupid opinion", I spent time on trying to convey to you what I meant and clarifying that none of it was an attack against you or your typing, just simply fleshing out my thoughts on what I've seen so far. Then in response to that clarification, you go ahead in this ridiculously blind belligerent way missing the point of several of my lines by assuming shit about them.

Are you just crazy or what? Is this because I called you emotional? Or if you can't handle disagreement or people seeing you as a type different from ILI, ask for your type thread to be closed.


Additionally, don't bullshit about me, I wasn't harassing you, as soon as you asked me to take it to your type thread, I did. Instantly. I was not typing you IEI just based on a few words either. But I just thought the input could help, otherwise I don't have a personal problem with you typing as ILI, feel free to, why not, my earlier disclaimer implied that you could even be right but you didn't even read my disclaimer on that and instead you went into full-on nearly psychotic paranoia and projecting stuff.

To respond to another line of yours, it's fully in my right to see you as IEI if that's what you come off as to me until there is something that shows ILI more clearly instead. And, instead of you just wanting to "stop" me, I prefer neutral reasoning. Otoh, if you don't want me to mention the IEI typing, I won't. You can ask me (and other people) not to mention a non-ILI typing even in this thread. Simple as that. But then just close your type thread because it no longer has a purpose then.

Finally, I never said that I know better than you. I was doing my best to make it clear that I'm aware that I'm only working off of data I've seen on this forum and you have more data about yourself etc. And I did not ignore your arguments, I was responding to them in detail. You, however, again chose to skip words when reading my responses and distorted them in a way as negative as possible. And you ended it with retyping me and essentially claiming someone is only a real logical type if they change their views automatically just based on what you argue with. No comment.

PS. Replied to/clarified some of the bits of the Socionics related parts of your post because you were so crazily misinterpreting what I said (in spoiler).

How is doing maths exercises Te. If anything, math is Ti because it heavily involves rules and laws

Later you state laws you are interested in maths are Te because you gather information, no, you explicitly said earlier that you look at conceptual reasoning, not simply information gathering. Anyhow, mathematics involves both Ti and Te, the Ti part is clear to you, one Te part is working with the mathematical equations etc "as is" without the reasoning Ti would give.

Good question. I just don't care.

The "why" was stated earlier by you already and it was Ethics based: "To me it feels like it sucks the fun and mystery out of reality, lol".

Of course, anybody does that, whether you admit it or not. It's funny that you think that relying on your own view to reason is abnormal. As if you are some God that views the world objectively, instead of subjectively. Get off your fucking high horse, please.
Even if you do copy the views of others mindlessly, which, apparently, people without Te polr do according to your implications you still make it to be YOUR view.
So yeah, gone with your shitty argument.

Misinterpretation. The point was about the brand of Logical reasoning, not simply about having your own view - Te deals with facts instead of own reasoning. And I never implied that I'm some kind of objective God or that non-Te PoLR people copy the views of others...

The God line was also very Te PoLR from you: Te is the objective view, Ti is the subjective view in the Logical area.

What do you mean facts? The ''fact'' that I got Te polr? Who says that is a fact? You?

Facts on your thinking, preferences, behaviour, etc.

Yeah, I'm skeptical of outside sources, just like an ILI is supposed to be. I can give you another socionics quote in which they describe how an ILI is naturally skeptical, even nicknamed ''The Critic''

Te PoLR brand of skepticism is skepticism about outside sources. ILI is skeptical in a different way that the ILI descriptions show.

Because first of all you don't know your shit about socionics, and secondly you are ignorant as fuck to any new info I put forward, just like a true Te polr. Congrats, I turned your own argument against you.

This line of yours is, frankly, ridiculous since I had to explain basic Socionics concepts to you and you hardly pay attention to new info that I was pointing out. Your trying to retype me as Te PoLR on its own doesn't turn any of my arguments against me.

You don't get that I take everything into account, obviously. You think I'm lying to myself?
Are you implying you're seeing stuff that I don't see? See it's this arrogance that annoys me about you.

Correct, you did not take everything into account since you didn't even read my lines properly. And yeah there was stuff you didn't see, no one sees everything. If you think you do always see everything then that IS arrogance lol.

Okay explain, because I'm pretty sure Te polr and weak Ti manifests itself in daily matters, whatever that means.

I was saying that Socionics Logic isn't the same as street smarts logic in daily life.

Yeah, so? My point still fucking stands. Is that all you can say? You are clearly OR missing my point, or arguing around it, highlighting some petty detail, as if that was the point of the argument, then disarming it as if you refuted my whole argument.

The point was that Te PoLR dislikes the financial stuff because it's a pita for them, not simply due to preferring to focus on the Ni musings, I don't see this as some petty detail.

I was just using ''the law'' as an example wtf. Stop twisting my words and stop being an idiot who sees someone say ''the law is right'' and immediately jumps on ''oh he's saying 'law is right', that's something a Ti lead would say, so this guy is Ti''. Like seriously, that's the most shallow way of reasoning ever.

Again you missed the point. I was saying "no, the law is right because this and this and this" is a Ti reasoning - since it explains the logical idea instead of just stating facts. I was not using "laws" as some kind of buzzword for Ti.

The rest of your "point" is incoherent rambling trying to refute something that I never even implied. You keep assuming without reason that I just do shallow reasoning while you don't even fully read my lines so no wonder you end up missing what I was actually saying and imagine some bs in place. End of story.

[Bertrand]

[Myst]

Not really, I said what I think, I don't have time to spend it on further drama regardless of whether OP continues to do this.

[Bertrand]

what kind of beta are you! fight it out, the conflict reveals truth anyway

[Myst]

what kind of beta are you! fight it out, the conflict reveals truth anyway

Heh well I don't care to engage in nonconstructive conflict as soon as I see it's not leading anywhere.

[Bertrand]

hey look the popcorn justifies a lot, ask hamlet an audience is everything

now back into the fray with you

[Slade]

I agree with @Slade that you are probably not even LSI, or any logical type for that matter. I think you might be projecting YOUR Te polr onto me. Why?
Because you're pulling the same shit onto me that Medusa (who pretty much has confirmed Te polr) was doing to me aswel: insisting I am a certain type, which might have been plausible at first glance.
At second glance, when I provided you both with more information about myself, which proved your first impression of me wrong, you should have obviously changed your minds, but you both never did, because you have Te polr. (or are retards, I don't know, I don't judge lol)
Just like @Medusa you kept harrassing me and singling out random posts of mine in random topics and pointing towards the type, even though I already refuted your claims and impressions with factual information about myself.
So yeah, there's that. Don't really know what else to say to make you stop thinking I've got a Te polr or am Fe creative, but yeah I guess there's no arguing with a person who can't take in information like normal people can.

Yeah, she's not. It's laughably obvious.

Wtf on earth triggered you like this?

This completely paranoid, projecting crazy post you made now... You were misreading virtually everything I said, getting stuck on words to oversimplify and misrepresent my points, and trying to read negative things into my lines.

Additionally, don't bullshit about me, I wasn't harassing you, [/spoiler]

How many people have to get pissed off at you before you realize it's you thats the problem and not them? Yes, what you did was harassment. Commenting on people's types who clearly don't want your input is harassment which you have done multiple times. Stop playing the victim.

[Bertrand]

medusa seems more Te polr, i.e. Ti mobilizing, whereas Myst strikes me as Ne polr, but not logical either, i.e. ESI in all likelihood. For what its worth I like ESI so please don't be mad, Myst

I'm not above a little harassment so I see no problem with this, but I do think Number 9's, reproduced by Slade above, quote is really on the money as to how you're perceived. you need to know this. just think about it

[Myst]

Yeah, she's not. It's laughably obvious.

How many people have to get pissed off at you before you realize it's you thats the problem and not them? Yes, what you did was harassment. Commenting on people's types who clearly don't want your input is harassment which you have done multiple times. Stop playing the victim.

Not playing victim, simply stating what is going on.

"Clearly"? He didn't tell me he had a problem with it, when he did tell me, I instantly respected his request.

You, on the other hand, are not respecting my request.

The request I made here: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...=1#post1210789

So who is doing harassment here? (Rhetorical question...)

[Myst]

medusa seems more Te polr, i.e. Ti mobilizing, whereas Myst strikes me as Ne polr, but not logical either, i.e. ESI in all likelihood. For what its worth I like ESI so please don't be mad, Myst

I'm not above a little harassment so I see no problem with this, but I do think Number 9's, reproduced by Slade above, quote is really on the money as to how you're perceived. you need to know this. just think about it

I'd actually like to be ESI. I'm not even joking. LIEs can be pretty attractive.

As for the Ne PoLR yeah, I know how that makes that impression on some people. But it's more like, I can actually change my reasoning about something if I process more new data, provided there is enough data and that the new explanation fits better. Other than that, only very strong arguments can work.